Gloria Steinem writes the wrong article..again.

The Media Sisterhood of the Women's Movement but only when it's career and financially rewarding or politically expedient. With Friends like these, who needs enemies? I guess Oprah should be up there as well and probably a few others.

In a little blurb leading off this article which has been spinning around on the internet for a couple of days now, and which I read via a link at Lambert's Blog at Corrente, Steinem wastes no time in stating, "Sarah Palin shares nothing but a chromosome with Hillary Clinton." From that alone one can easily surmise where the article is going to end, despite what Steinem decleares in this early paragraph:

Women have become so politically powerful that even the anti-feminist right wing -- the folks with a headlock on the Republican Party -- are trying to appease the gender gap with a first-ever female vice president. We owe this to women -- and to many men too -- who have picketed, gone on hunger strikes or confronted violence at the polls so women can vote. We owe it to Shirley Chisholm, who first took the "white-male-only" sign off the White House, and to Hillary Rodham Clinton, who hung in there through ridicule and misogyny to win 18 million votes.

Yes, it all sounds very liberalistic, heroistic, and feministic, (although you mysteriously fail to answer the big question. If women have become so powerful and equal, why is the candidate with the most votes, Hillary, on the outside looking in? Guess they have a ways to go yet) but Steinem wastes no time in opening up the very same trap door that the other liberals have been trying to shove Palin into for the past week:

This isn't the first time a boss has picked an unqualified woman just because she agrees with him and opposes everything most other women want and need. Feminism has never been about getting a job for one woman. It's about making life more fair for women everywhere. It's not about a piece of the existing pie; there are too many of us for that. It's about baking a new pie.

So, right away Steinem, who by now sounds is if she is dressing up for Halloween early by donning her very best Maureen Dowd disguise, states unequivacally without having talked to or interviewed Palin personally, that she is unqualified, despite the fact that Palin has managed to do quite well as the governor of Alaska, which the last time I looked was still one of the fifty states and not yet a province of the Republic of Liberia. But you could hardly tell that by listening to the ranting and ravings of what I now call the lefty loons of the progressive blogosphere, a club Steinem seems to be in a hurry to sign up with.

Steinem compounds her problems by making the same mistake so many other so called defenders of women's rights have made over the past few days. She discards all logic and states that because she (Palin) agrees with McCain, that somehow makes her unworthy of being a vice-presidential pick. In other words, if you aren't Democrat, or if your views might stray a bit from what the Steinem viewpoint is, then instead of vying to become vice president you should be home baking an apple pie, putting on a negligee and taking care of your man. It seems that in Steinem's world, you can only belong to the Sisterhood of Woman's Rights club if you're willing to agree with her and her private clique about anything and every thing regarding every single woman's issue out there.

Gloria, you do understand that Palin is a Republican, don't you? Gloria, you do understand that it is usual protocol for the Presidential nominee and his vice presidential pick to make an effort to be on the same page, even if they weren't before hand? I'm sure if you were to ask Biden about his own many disdainful comments regarding Obama, his answer would be that that was then, this is now and things are different because now I'm the nominee. Yet, you would expect less from Sarah Palin?

And like so many others in The Fraternity of Liberal Womanhood, I don't think you have even been paying attention to the treasure chest full of mixed words and messages coming from Barack "I'll let my disciples, blog, and tv network do my misogyny and sexism for me" Obama.

Really, I wonder if those on the left truly understand how ignorant they must appear to the voting public when they spout lines such as you do (again) about Palin's inexperience while at the same time disregarding the same lack of virtues of the very candidate at the top of the Democratic Ticket that you support. That of course would be Barack "I've never met a woman's issue I cared about unless it was for political expediency" Obama of course.

Tell me Ms. Steinem, at what point has Mr. B.O. Superstar stood up and talked about any of the issues concerning women? At what point did he call off his paid sexist attack dogs in the blogosphere? At what point did he proclaim enough was enough when the pundits at his own private network of misogyny, MSNBC, spouted their sexist bile against Hillary Clinton day after day? At what point did you and the Sisterhood speak out when pundit Keith Obamaman went on two ten minute rampages against Hillary Clinton accusing her of being nothing more than a racist shill? At what point does the Sisterhood finally call out the candidate on his failures regarding the sexist misogynistic attacks on Ms. Clinton instead or wrenching their necks trying to kiss his ass simply because he appears to hold the right viewpoints during an election year, while disregarding them for the next 1,461 days? At what point do you call into account Obama's shoulder dusting and finger gestures toward's Hillary? And since you seem dead ass set on talking about qualifications, where is your article asking why in the hell Biden was picked over immensely qualifeid Hillary for the vice presidential job?

Honestly, the silence from Mr. B.O., the Democratic Sisterhood, and the Democrats in general has been deafening, just as it was from many of those such as yourself who now proclaim to be so concerned about the reasons McCain may have or may not have had for picking Ms. Palin.

The problem Ms. Steinem, is that you and so many others like you are only interested in fighting for those women causes you say you believe in when it is politically convenient, just like the candidate whose virtues you espouse, and whose lack of regard for women everywhere has been front and center in this whole campaign because as Obama's triumphant song in Iowa told us, "bitches ain't shit."

It's one thing to wax poetic about the sexist attacks against Hillary as you did, it's quite another to continually let the man who could have stopped it at any time off the hook simply because you now view him as your candidate on the right issues at the right time. Or so he (ahem...cough...cough)says. (I think, although I haven't actually heard the words myself.)

Don't feel bad. At least you are a member of a pretty huge club at the moment with yourself, Randi Rhodes, Taylor Marsh, and Rachel Maddow right there at the head of the table as Maureen Dowd conducts the band.

Amazingly, you barely take time to mention the hateful diatribe toward Palin emanating from the progressive blogosphere like so much raw sewage, words that had nothing to do with her political viewpoints, or her qualifications as they all searched to find out if Palin really was a mother and how she caused her baby to be born with Downs Syndrome, and whether or not she kept her virginity until she was married. I won't even mention the fact that you and the sisters want to look the other way while US magazine puts sexist Palin bile on their cover while bestowing sainthood on the Obama man in a previous article.

Instead, after one sentence you unfolded your official Obama talking points and wrote about Palin's qualifications because when the Messiah speaks, that's what's really important and women's issues should be somewhere down a very long list. You couldn't even bother to find out first hand how much of your talking points were really true and how much was the usual exaggerated political bullshit coming at us from all sides these days. Most of your article is the same exact copy regarding Palin I've been reading for the past week on one progressive blog after another so why bother? It's nothing new.

But hey, Rachel Maddow parlayed her hear no evil, speak no evil, and see no evil stance into a paying job at the Obama network right alongside her main male mentor Keith Obamaman, and that's what's really important isn't it? And hell, Taylor Marsh may get that regular radio gig yet. She now not only looks the other way regarding the sexism and misogyny of the past week, she has joined in the fun herself for all it's worth. But she did ride the Hillary horse for a while while she built up her readership before stabbing them and women in general in the back.

And Randi "Hillary is a fucking whore" Rhodes may have been fired, but she walked smiling straight into another gig no worse for wear and more silence from the progressive women of the so called progressive political party. Where was your article then, Ms. Steinem? Better yet, where is the real article and what it should really be about instead of another hit piece emanating from the Obama camp?

Earlier this week, there was an article stating that one of the main failures of the Democratic Party is to protest or protect when unwarranted attacks are placed against one of their candidates. And that would be one of the many problems facing the women's movement these days. Too many women who do hold positions in the media in one form or another, simply find it more expedient and cash generating to turn the other cheek, look the other way, stick their head in the sand, ignore sexism and misogyny all together, speak out when it is all over and done with and safe to come out of the water so that they can sell other women, books, deodorant, hair spray, and tampons like Oprah does on a regular daily basis catapulting herself to billionaire status..

And then they do their best, such as you do, to convince the Sisterhood to forgive and forget it all because at least your candidate is the candidate of the party that really really really honestly truly cares about every single women's issue out there important to one and all. So get over it and kiss Obama's ass, why don't you, or we'll drag out the Supreme Court threat in another four years.

Maybe you and your aforementioned feminine mistake buddies should just go ahead and explain to women everywhere at what point is it more important to put your career ahead of principle, your cash flow ahed of ideas, and at which point do you shut up so as not to become too abrasive so that you might make a few extra bucks and keep that best seller on the New York Times for an extra week or two.

That I think is the biggest problem facing the women's movement these days. It's not that Palin doesn't deserve defending against misogynistic and sexist attacks just as Hillary did or any women does for that matter. It's the fact that because her views are different from yours, you can't even bring yourself to write the article that should have been. Instead we get another expedient Obama/Biden political advertisement on the so called lack of Palin's qualifications with total disregard for the lack of anything remotely resembling qualifications from Obama. Hell, we all know Palin's a Republican so what did you really expect from her? Your article was hardly informative.

But if you and the Sisterhood can't bring yourself to defend Palin, Hillary, or any other woman against sexist attacks, regardless of their political affiliation, much less then when it's only convenient for you, then the women's movement will continue to stagnate. As long as women like Taylor Marsh, Randi Rhodes, Rachel Maddow, Arianna Huffington, and Maureen Dowd continue to go along and gleefully join in with the sexist hate and ridicule, all in the name of supporting their Party and their male candidates, and in the name of furthering their careers or loading up their pocketbooks, then the women's movement will continue to remain dormant no matter how many so called progressive men are on the ballot.

But maybe, just maybe the women's movement will eventually find new leadership out there willing to put principles front and center, first and foremost. I think they are headed there now and will find that leadership eventually. I think that is why we now see the growing PUMA's and Just Say No Deal movement. A movement borne from the fact that they are tired of being played like a fiddle only when it's time to put their x next to the candidate of choice, and tired of those who claim to be on the same page but only want to invite them to do the big sell out.

Hopefully it'll be a leadership that does put principles and women's issues front and center instead of kissing the asses of the good old boys club every time they haul out the voting booths. When and if that day comes, then maybe you can head over to Taylor's or Mo's or Rachel's duplex and keep each other company reading excerpts from your books and articles while reminiscing about the good old days when you once meant something. But that was a long time ago, wasn't it?